From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Twitter has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Revisions suggested 12/10/13[edit]

Please copy record tweet information from “Growth” section to the “Record Tweets” section. The heading “Record Tweets” only has two record tweets under it, and would be improved by adding more record tweets from the “Growth” section.

The first paragraph of the “Issues and Controversies” section should be altered. Most of the paragraph leads the reader to assume that Twitter has played a large role in the Arab Spring. Then the last sentence discredits that line of thought by stating only a small fraction of the population of Arab Spring countries are active on Twitter. Please revise to state a debate exists as to the size of the role Twitter has had in these revolutions. Twitter revolutions should possibly have its own heading, where this debate can be summarized.

The following text should be included to introduce the Arab Spring section of the first paragraph of “Issues and Controversies”. In 2009, the Western world projected Twitter onto the green revolution in Iran. Twitter did play a role in the uprising, but not to the extent the Western media said it did. An extreme minority of Iranians used Twitter at that point in time. Twitter did help publicize the events of the green revolution in an otherwise secretive and closed country, but Twitter did not drive the masses into the streets of Tehran. source:


>> Turkey urges social media firms to pay taxLihaas (talk) 13:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 April 2014[edit]

Although Twitter is the first to use SMS to broadcast texts, the University of Michigan used a program called B-page written in C, to broadcast the same amount of information to text pagers in 1998. Sm0knGun (talk) 00:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 01:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

correction or enhancement for lead section[edit]

Currently in the lead paragraph there is a list of local offices referenced by ...#cite-note-10 this could more appropriately be referenced to & include non-American offices — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Request edit on 19 May 2014[edit]

The following sources are not returning the correct page. I have provided the source number, the incorrect link and the correct link below:

6. - 13. -

Twitter have not implemented an automatic redirect on these links.

There are more, but as this is my first edit I'll work on them slowly. Thank you.

Steve Stretton (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Implemented 03:51, 7 June 2014 (UTC) by —My Ubuntu (talk)

(The above requested edit was made by clicking on a link in an automatically added notice.)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2014[edit]

Please add additional event under Growth section right before "On June 4, 2014, Twitter announced that it will acquire." Please add On March 27, 2014, Twitter announced a new music strategy [1]> but did not provide further details on the strategy but industry experts [2] predict the strategy involves pushing Twitter towards a music platform. Ec2929 (talk) 02:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Wall Street Journal (March 27, 2014). "Twitter to Relaunch Music Strategy". Retrieved June 4, 2014. 
  2. ^ Chang, Elizabeth. "Twitter’s Big Weakness and Why It Could Fail". K-Pop Meets the USA. Retrieved June 4, 2014. 

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Same blog - same problem. The young lady writes intelligently, but is not a reliable source for the claims. Thanks, Older and ... well older (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2014 (UTC)


Re this edit: the material about GCHQ is being added to multiple articles in a careless way. [1] is a primary source document which establishes no context for the reader. There should be a secondary source discussing this material. In its current form, Wikipedia is being spammed with multiple mentions of a single source here. Unless another source can be found, this is being blown up out of all proportion.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Add to religion[edit] Pope Francis has one, should be listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:53, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


"Edward Cramer" is not a founder (that I know of/can find with a quick google search), and should be removed from that section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Done.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:30, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2014[edit]

I want to change the statistices of most foloowed accounts. please allow me to do so. Ralu7 (talk) 15:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Tutelary (talk) 15:33, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

"Signup denied"[edit]

Re this edit: For me, the citation given is a login page which does not mention the problem (screenshot here). Also, I couldn't find anything about this in a reliable secondary source. If you are having problems with signing up or logging in to Twitter, it would be best to ask them why.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:03, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

The edit that you have reverted mentions signups from personal computers being denied, not logins. The provided primary source from Twitter proved the case. If we went by your logic and rely only on secondary sources, then Wikipedia would be nothing more than a speculation and conspiracy website. But I can understand your determination to prevent getting this information into the article if you work for Twitter. Have a good day. (talk) 11:43, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
WP:PRIMARY sources are rarely satisfactory if they are not mentioned in secondary sources. I've never come across this before, and could not find any secondary sources referring to it. Even if true, this leads to questions about its notability.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 12:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I think this is notable because signups are required for people who want to use Twitter, and I assume this is something that people might want to be aware of. Happyonwiki (talk) 12:22, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
When something is notable, it will normally have appeared in reliable secondary sources. I couldn't even find any blog or forum threads mentioning this problem, which is unusual. If possible, please could you take a screenshot of the message, and note down any links that you are being given.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 12:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Here are two message board sources: [2] [3] If you want to have more, you need to do an actual search instead of just talking. (talk) 12:47, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
OK thanks, you can learn something new every day. I'm still concerned about the notability and WP:NOTHOWTO aspect, because this does not appear to be a common problem. The sourcing does not say why this message appears. A guess is that this message may appear if JavaScript is turned off. JavaScript is required for the web version of the Twitter site to work correctly. Either that or the IP address is being blocked to prevent abusive signups. It is a mystery. This is the normal Twitter signup page; I'm not having any problems at the moment.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:05, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I have read somewhere that you need to complete the signup page before you arrive at the Signup Denied page. You are welcome. (talk) 13:16, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Right now, without any secondary source that highlights the problem, it is original research to assume this is an intentional/malicious action by Twitter to some potential users. As ianmacm points out this could be a simple issue of not properly allowing Javascript to run. Forum posts cannot be used as sources for this type of statement. --MASEM (t) 13:56, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
You got this the other way around. This WOULD be speculation were it relying on secondary sources instead of the provided primary source from Twitter. But you are an administrator on Wikipedia, so I guess you make the rules here. Anyone else willing to touch the subject, this is the content that was removed from the article. (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Twitter is currently denying signups from personal computers in some places, and prompting users to instead use Twitter from mobile phones with the following message: [4]
Signup Denied
We cannot create a new account from this computer. Download the free Twitter app for your Android or iPhone, and start using Twitter on your phone instead.

You, as a WP editor, cannot say "Twitter has this message" and come out with the conclusion "Twitter is effectively forcing people to use their smartphones instead of computers to use Twitter". A secondary source from a reliable source would be able to make that claim (say, if the Wall Street Journal made that statement). Alternatively, if Twitter themselves had a FAQ that said "There are limited situations where we cannot allow users to use Twitter via browser due to..." then we can use that. But just presenting the message and claiming this is a situation is original research and absolutely disallowed. --MASEM (t) 15:16, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
"source from a reliable source" - yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I'm so glad that I don't think like you do. (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I said "secondary second from a reliable source". That's exactly how we work on WP, per WP:V and WP:OR. --MASEM (t) 15:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Better read again what you said. You also said that Wall Street Journal is a reliable source, another thing I disagree with. (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
WSJ is considers a highly reliable source by WP. It's not what you think is an RS. --MASEM (t) 16:01, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
That explains everything. (talk) 16:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
The two forum sources [5] and [6] both date from August 2014, so it is possible that Twitter has changed its signup rules in some way in the last few days. WP:UNDUE is also involved, because it should be possible to find some reliable secondary sources referring to this. On the basis of the current sourcing, it isn't really verifiable or noteworthy enough to mention. Watch this space, if other people keep getting this message, it may receive more widespread coverage.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:40, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it may be a new change, and particularly with the recent noise over being a much bigger story, this change in Twitter may not yet have the newsworthiness to be discovered by others. If someone does report the apparent change, we can then consider it possible. --MASEM (t) 15:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)